The Case of the Disappearing Workfare Scheme

It seems that despite Iain Duncan Smith’s tantrum yesterday – when he insisted he would not back down on forced work for the poor – one major chunk of the Government’s workfare policies has disappeared.

The floundering Community Action Programme (CAP) is one of the nastiest workfare schemes, which sentences people to six months unpaid work simply for being long term unemployed. This scheme was intended for the 96.5% of people who aren’t likely to find work during the two year Work Programme. The message was clear, if you can’t find a job in two years then you will be expected to work, full time, for nothing.

The ‘Trailblazer’ for this scheme was one of the programmes challenged in the courts recently. Jamieson Wilson, a former lorry driver, was stripped of benefits and left destitute after refusing to undertake unpaid work on the scheme. Along with Cait Reilly, who was forced to work in Poundland for no pay on a different programme, they took their case to the High Court.

As is well known now, both of the scheme were found to be unlawful on largely technical grounds. Simply put, neither the legislation behind the schemes, or the information given to claimants, was legally sufficient. The DWP’s panicky response was to issue new regulations and rush them before Parliament.

The new regulations make no mention of the Community Action Programme, or any comparable scheme, which means for now, the programme would seem to be still illegal.

It is possible the DWP are planning to table some specific regulations for this scheme just as soon as skiving Employment Minister Mark Hoban makes it into the office. It is equally possible they fucked up the new regulations and forgot about it. In fact with the DWP mired in chaos, almost anything seems plausible at the moment.

The scheme has not yet been launched nationally and the Trailblazer pilots are over, so this is unlikely to affect anyone currently on workfare. But it does suggest that a major plank of Iain Duncan Smith’s bodged welfare reforms is either being rethought, or has been abandoned completely.

This is hardly surprising. The early analysis of the scheme revealed it had no impact in actually helping people find work. More importantly, providers were struggling to find work placements. This problem can only have become much worse recently as a growing number of charities snub the Government’s workfare obsession. Even workfare profiteers like Poundland are attempting to distance themselves from the DWP shambles (whilst still attempting, possibly illegally, to ensure they have a steady stream of unpaid workers).

Lack of placements has dogged workfare programmes ever since Tony Blair launched the first mass workfare scheme in the late 90s with the New Deal for Young People. The truth is a lot of charity work is quite specialised and outside of charity shops the voluntary sector has no real need of hundreds of thousands of unpaid full time staff. Now even the charity shops are pulling out, many in disgust at the brutal sanctions regime and new powers to send sick and disabled claimants to work unpaid.

This hasn’t stopped some charities, such as The Conservation Volunteers (@tcvtweets) or Sue Ryder (@Sue_Ryder), who are only too happy to force people to work for free. Many more companies, including Poundland, but also Superdrug and Argos, have discovered it can be profitable to take on unpaid temporary staff for work which involves little training.

It’s too early to say whether CAP is gone for good or the real impact of last week’s judgement on workfare. There is even speculation as to whether the new regulations, which are only slightly less vague than the old ones, would withstand another legal challenge.

The DWP is ploughing ahead regardless of the consequences and insists that it’s business as usual on the workfare gravy train and no-one will be repaid sanctioned benefits. The lawyers disagree. Iain Duncan Smith is near meltdown, picking a fight with not just shelf stackers, by insisting they work for free, but also the Judiciary and bizarrely, even geologists.

There is still a long way to go to end workfare. But if you kick something hard enough and for long enough it will break eventually. Join the Week of Action Against Workfare beginning on 18th March and help bring a final end to forced labour for good: http://www.boycottworkfare.org/?p=1996

Okay. Here is my two cents. I have no objection on moral grounds in doing something in return for my JSA. Indeed, I would rather be putting something back into the community. NOT into the profits of companies like Poundland. But my point is this; I have certain skills to offer. Skills that I have worked for and studied for over many years. I am sure, that these skills could be deployed in a MEANINGFUL fashion, to help my local communtity. With the political will to do so, and the resources in place to facilitate that. Give me something WORTHWHILE to do, and I will do it. Yes, and I will even do it for FREE. Otherwise, Mr Ian Duncan Smith, it is the GOING RATE FOR THE JOB.

I think they rushed to redo it that fast that they’ve totally fucked it up – the court decision was handed down at 10:00am and the new rules and regs were laid before parliament at 6:15pm the same day – way too fast!

@ Purple Goon,
Fair enough, though I think all forced labour is wrong and all the schemes you mention should be voluntary, not least because whoever is running them (no matter what good intentions they start out with) will find it hard not to regard those forcibly employed as second class citizens. It corrupts the people who run the scheme more than people they have, effectively, the power of life and death over.

The present schemes are based on the lie that there are jobs for everyone if only people would take them. IDS is so far gone he can no longer help himself, free-will no longer comes into it, all he can do is repeat over and over the same lie and lets face it the media doesn’t really challenge him. They don’t want to pay taxes so welfare must be cut somehow and unemployed must be scapegoated. They don’t want the directors of the banks who have been involved in the biggest fraud in financial history to go to jail because that is “Us” so they will continue to persecute the poorer sectors of society, “Them”, until sheer fear makes them stop.

@john yeah but in their world they dont want you claiming do they?..they dont mind the free labour in fact they wish you would do the work for free without claiming…and theres that EMPLOYED/NOT EMPLOYED problem they cant figure out just like the VOLUNTARY/MANDATORY conundrum..

Liberty and Anti-Slavery International have suggested an amendment to the Coroners and
Justice Bill, which has been tabled by Baroness Young and supported by others, in order to
introduce clear, dissuasive and enforceable offences of servitude and forced labour. This
would give clear effect to Britain’s obligations under Article 4 of the European Convention on
Human Rights (ECHR) and the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Conventions on
Forced Labour (Conventions 29 and 105).

THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 4 ECHR
4. Article 4 ECHR, incorporated into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998, provides that “no
one shall be held in slavery or servitude” , or “be required to perform forced or compulsory
labour”. This must be read within the framework of other international law obligations.
Article 25 of ILO Convention 29, also ratified by the United Kingdom, provides that
“the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal
offence, and it shall be an obligation on any Member State ratifying this
Convention to ensure that penalties imposed by law are really adequate and are
strictly enforced”.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has held that Article 4 ECHR requires states to
have criminal legislation in force which offers sufficient practical protection to those held in
slavery or servitude or required to perform forced or compulsory labour, and which makes it
possible for the culprits to be punished. Such legislation must be sufficiently robust and clear
to be enforceable and enforced.
And yet this government is braking European Human Rights to with it agreed to uphold.

i didnt know that ingeus was owned by Deloitte..they are the advisors to companies like vodaphone tax fraudsters..
around the time of the student tuition fee hike deloittte were recruiting school leavers (kids work for free) based on the tuition fee hike.suggesting that the tuition fee hike might put off school leavers going to university or college..thus training the next generation of tax fraud advisors…UTTER BASTARDS..

this community action program is full of fucked up language FOL..
Look at this crap..
How will PRaP recognise Balance of Time (BOT) referrals?
Not all programmes have BOT; if there is a BOT (e.g. JRFND) it is transferred as part of information on all referrals via PRaP; so suppliers are informed of the remaining time each customer has left in the case of re-referrals. Business rule validation is in place to prevent double-counting

If we all keep kicking the proram then maybe we can put Idiot Smith in the same state of mind as some of us to whit depressed, manic and twitchy wouldn’t that be poetic justice. I would love to see him cope with one of these pretend conditions.

Again, a bit like his education, not much to write about. Iain was given a rather grand position as as aide-de-camp to Major-General Sir John Acland in Rhodesia. He was noted for his combative skills at croquet, but rumors of him leading missions involving the Selous Scouts are pure myth and not backed up by any evidence. He also saw service in Northern Ireland, as chef-de-camp in the cook house where he was in charge of peeling spuds, (Its where he got his nick-name potato head).

C.A.P. is not there because it was one of the several programmes deemed to be ilegal by the High Court Ruling last tuesday – the only programme that has survived is the 4 weeks Mandatory Work Activity (MWA) also the Work Programme in general.

it may be money pissed away but that and increased social housing to meet private rents make it look as though the welfare bill is increasing year on year and the need to sanction people to reduce costs or yet more austerity and welfare reform. All jobs for tory donators at the expense of benefit claimants, who are condemned as the ones responsible for increased welfare payments even though many are being denied them with no legal redress to initial appeal.

I don’t understand, I took part in the community programme in the early 1980s, it was for a year but we had ours extended so we could finish the project. The work was very interesting and we got paid the going rate for the work (more than what the NMW would be). Criminals do community work for nothing, or is it now a criminal offence to be unemployed?

@ABERT yes it is ..in fact you are deemed a criminal unless you are a millionaire at least…anyone below that station is a lying theiving bastard and should,be put in jail without bread and water unless its privatised

” The reason that this occurs is that whereas you are better off working in Starbucks UK than having a better than MacJob in Poland, we have created a welfare system in the UK and a moral climate where there is no shame in being welfare addicted so many native born Brits folks opt to stay on welfare rather than take a MacJob.” FUCKWIT UTTER

Off Topic
Britian on benefits next Monday channel 4 at 8pm
Sick an disabled.
the disability living allowance helps 3 million people with disabillities to work.
Ade depitan examines governments plans to reduce the number of claimants

@guy fawkes but I don’t. I post examples of it like others do on here and parody and mock it. Do you think johnny would accept me on herr if i did. I get told off for posting too much stuff that shows this govt is full of crap by using their own material.

Thought i’d include this link in promotion of two simple and quick actions that need to be acted out quickly to get these new regs annulled. For those on social media it is well worth bombarding John O’Farrell on the question of workfare with the Eastleigh by-election next week!

THESE comments are now truly and utterly looking like a standing joke;
The same two dozen people contributing over and over again_
Do you believe ANYBODY in power cares?
Do you not realise you have already Destroyed any Quedos your posts have cos you have bitched on for a year?
Its past the point of ‘Activists’-Its now just ‘Sadacts’ _
Get a fucking life. And thats from your own backyard.

The abolition of Social Fund Crisis Loans from 1 April 2013 means that Crisis Loan alignment payments will also end. Claimants making a new claim to benefit, and who cannot manage until their first payday will, from April onwards, have to apply for a Short Term Benefit Advance (STBA) instead.
CONDITIONS
***DWP DOES NOT INTEND TO ADVERTISE THE AVAILABILITY OF STBAs TO THE PUBLIC . They will be only offered to a claimant if they indicate to the member of staff taking their claim that they cannot manage financially. The availability of a STBA will not be immediately obvious to those claiming on line.***
STBAs are subject to three criteria:
• There is an underlying benefit entitlement or reasonable expectation that there is entitlement to benefit;
• The claimant can afford to repay – other debt and loan repayments will be taken into account;
• There is financial need – there is serious risk to the health and safety of a family member.
• Typical of the DWP, WE WONT TELL THE SCROUNGERS.
• They can fucking starve, they are all fucking bastards, they don’t give a fuck, they have their lovely warm homes, plenty of food on the table, money in their pockets, etc

@Pat – This is very nasty and will make the first month in a new job next to impossible for lots of people – instead of being able to concentrate on getting into the job/learning the ropes, they will be scared about how they are going to make it through until their first pay day without either running out of food/money for travel costs/bills etc. etc. (Anything new/work-related that they may need for their role – eg. shoes/work-style clothes which they may not have ‘to hand’ depending on how long they’ve not been in work/what their situation prior to becoming unemployed was like). It’s really vicious/heartless.

(Will make it harder to convince at interview, in terms of confidence in being able to make honest statements/fulfil promises made, knowing that all this will be up ahead should a job offer follow).

Did YOU , or ANYBODY ELSE on here COMPLAIN,when
the powers that be or were ,allowed min wage jobs to be paid bacs
monthly without choice? Did you? No is the answer to that, because you didnt think that far ahead, or believe it affected YOU. The right to be paid weekly in coinage of the realm for manual labour was there for a reason.Now we have the situation whereby the unemployed practically have to Starve for six weeks before they apply for a job they might get in case they have to pull up £200 for a months tube fares. The ritish ulic JUST DONT THINK!

@Pat Ato Can only speak for myself but at the risk of sounding a bit IDS, I didn’t know that this had happened. (Depending on when it did, I may have been either young and pretty clueless/busy with other things/poorly-informed about the labour market/monthly-paid & uninformed and/or overseas – or all of the above). Perhaps, as we are now seeing, complaining could have made a negligible difference to whichever government (of the day)’s decision it was, if this was what they had decided to do & then went ahead & did. When I was growing up, ‘complaining’ to the extent of striking over pay & conditions was not unknown at all, & agree that the right to be paid properly & appropriately, a ‘fair/reasonable’ amount – whether that’s a wage or in the form of an unemployment benefit should be protected in law.

My experience has been that over a working life to date (with some breaks) comparable jobs have more recently paid proportionally less (& then even less) – including some that were not very far away from minimum wage (before there was one). Some – admittedly, fairly limited – ‘complaining’ took place with regard to pay/conditions – when working for employment agencies & weekly/weakly paid. Any ‘complaining’ though was limited by the fact that ‘they’ – the agency – were paying our (the insecurely employed)’s wages (by the hour) – and any pay to cover periods not in work either due to sickness or time off taken as annual leave, was seen as a bonus – or that was how we were encouraged to see it.

I have no idea how anyone can afford the cost of even standing still in London, let alone travelling on the tube/paying for accommodation – (just two of) the reasons it eventually became unaffordable/untenable for me to continue to live there. 700+ families are about to be moved out of Camden (unless someone can complain very loudly on their behalf very loudly, very soon) and then dropped down again somewhere hundreds of miles away – not even outer London, but into cities much further afield -as it has been decided that they can no longer afford the cost of individual rooms within their homes … forced to change schools/leave support networks/look for new jobs/arrange moving costs (?!). ‘We’, and everyone, should be jumping up & down and not allowing this – where do we start with our jumping up & down??

Would anyone vote for the introduction of a maximum wage? The grotesque inequality between the situations of those ‘with’ and those ‘without’ or with significantly less, has been in place for as long as I (my parents, and theirs) can remember & for centuries before that, but it’s only at times like these we are now in that some/more people find themselves being made aware of the ‘big picture’. Perhaps they might have felt ‘comfortable enough’/were trying to get on with living their lives in what they thought were ‘fairly good times’ before and didn’t always ‘see’ what was going on around them? Lots of us can be guilty of this but ‘better late than never’ still applies and there is now much to ‘complain’ about – in some cases it is already too late/is falling on ‘deaf ears’.

Well now you know.
Did you know banks give people overdrafts when they start jobs if there credit is still ok? This is aimed at youngsters leaving home.
They work for a month then the wages pay off the overdraft.
They live in the red despite earning. They have to use there cards everywhere they go because they will pay through the nose to withdraw money from a cashpoint. They go to the wetherspoons and pay for two pints with the debit card. The bank charges wetherspoons
60 pence for the transaction. Then you, the cash holding customer pay the same price for goods as the charge is factored into the prices. So you are subsidising the banks without even using your plastic by several pee a drink. Its the same everywhere. Thats why you get paid monthly in the bank. The gov.s over time give banks everything they want and we pay the price.If a business started passing on the cost at the till, the banks would close their accounts!

& thanks for the info. It would now be embarrassing to say anything other than “of course I understand the principle & pitfalls behind overdrafts”. (‘overdraft’ is now a less-than-favourite word) partly following on from the (dis)advantage of having a family whose motto was “never spend what you don’t have” but who also weren’t able to advise about how credit works, should it ever be used as a last resort. A bit like the “Just say no to drugs” advice, which also didn’t include complete information, yet was the main plank in a nationwide campaign.

‘Mr’ Wetherspoon – did he talk about his achievements in terms of leaving school with few (?no?) qualifications & being told he’d ‘go nowhere’ then making his vision work (pushing out other pubs and installing his brand), & having the idea of naming his version of pubs after his ex-headteacher as ‘revenge’? I could be imagining this. Where I live is largely a student area & the main local shop (a One-Stop) near to central local pubs/takeaways etc. has one of the cash machines that charge – there’s another of them in the pub opposite & only a couple of alternative cash machines – not within close walking distance in the immediate area. The ££s machines must be (as it were) coining it in. The chap in (is it Wigan?) who’s started his own ‘people’s bank – maybe should be invited to talk to students (& ex-students) on financial alternatives …

Many people over the last dozen or more so decades have started banks. They
were called ‘building societies’. They could do mortgages etc cheaper than banks cos they werent so based on profit.
But the gov.ts let the banks buy em all . . . . .
I dont know about Mr Martin leaving school wi nowt,but I am sure he trained as a solicitor after he left.
He doesnt have a huge influence anymore, they now charge just under the nearest rivals, not what they can do it for.The spirit of the company has changed.

And to boot Mr Chewie, you havent watched enough well written sci fi.;
If you were to follow the works of Isaac Assimov, Gene Roddenberry or Ronald D Moore you would Deduce that the slime isnt the result of a wandering minister,Captain; its 99.972% likely that the wandering minister is the offspring of said alien slime.
Praps you could start with some light reading;
I suggest ‘The Jonah’ by James Herbert, then
‘The Stand’ by a Steven King. Now if you will excuse me I have a whale to talk to.

IDS throws his dummy out of the pram on a regular basis these days, the reason being he doesn’t have a leg to stand on and the opposition to this policy of the work house is growing, not just from ordinary people but also from the courts and the legal profession who can all see it is doing nothing for the unemployed and is a fundamental attack on basic Human Rights. Everyone is entitled to a fair package of pay and benefits for any kind of work and that is how it should be and schemes such as this do nothing, other than encourage bad employers. Time the whole concept of work fare was kicked into the long grass along with IDS and the rest of his reactionary friends.

Yes, and the lazy shits do fuck all for the money.
I have seen em sitting about at the a4e office, surfing the bloody web all day.
Ids’s policy is to pay half the workforce to try to find work for the other half. There is no way the books will balance, it will lose a fortune.

I would have thought anyone who is unemployed is in a potentially if not already vulnerable position, the fact is those who are vulnerable should not be put into a work programme situation i.e. the sick and disabled (especially when they feel that being employed and getting to work on time can be fraught with complications), yet this does not deter atos from declaring them fit for work.

I personally would, mate, i’d be taking shits over the stock and wanking over displays, swearing at and brawling with customers (PTSD so them last 2 wouldn’t be by choice, but a foregone conclusion)
I earned the right to be a bolshie bastard in work and i carry that attitude through life.

Unfortunately, a lot on Workfare are absolutely fucking petrified, especially of sanctions, and the fear of destitution is a powerful motivator

While Labour of course, deliberately without mandate set out to deceive their voters, and allow 8 million migrants into the country to work as minimum wage slaves living three to a room and pay taxes on paltry wages whilst driving down the living wage, the price of housing up, and demand on housing stock,the national health system, schools, and anything else you have paid taxes for all your life, up.
Pensions incidentally, will go out the window. Its a numbers game. Those broaght in are paying those owed. Pyramid scheme!
You seem to equate being against europe as being Tory.
I dont understand why; Dave sucks brussels off in case he gets the boot next time, which is why most mp’s do, ala Kinnock and his Mrs Kinnock on 12000 euros /month plus x3 in expenses each.
Does france put up with it?
When you go into a chip shop and cod and chips is 6 bloody quid do you wonder why it takes 90 mins graft to earn a soggy supper?
I think you should look at europe a bit closer chum.

@Johnny Void. I applaud your support of womens day . Well done. However i have found some contradictions with regard to ESF. European Social Fund and its aims which is about stabilization.

May I quote here.

Aims

1.
To tackle long-term unemployment

2. To help young people and those at
risk from not being able to find work

3. To improve training, education
and counselling for lifelong learning

4. To encourage entrepreneurship
and adaptability in the workplace

5. To promote equal opportunities and
improve the role of women in the workforce

Who
can apply?

Any
legally constituted organisation – public or private – can apply for ESF. Sole traders or individuals
cannot apply. Students, for example, cannot apply for funding for their university courses.

To
qualify for ESF funding all applicants must show their planned project takes account of the ESF themes
of mainstreaming equal opportunities, information and communication technology, local development and
sustainable development.

So Johnny if ESF pays for the work program how does it sit with the other aims . You have sustainable employment but also supporting entrepreneurial business..

Oh, and the lifelong learning thing? What for, exactly? I am qualified as a bricky and an electrician, both in my own time.
But the guvernment wants me to be ‘competitive’!
So they import a million twats wi no inkling who did 6 weeks in albanian college to do the work badly for nothing;so why did I spend the time
and money? I cant wait till no 10 burns down with a sparks fault.

If the workfare companies are funded by ESF then they can only be , provided they fulfil those aims. Are the aims enshrined in law ? British or European law ? If not funded by ESF but by British taxation then that’s not good value for money. Something the DWP makes a point of.

Why does IDS persist with a scheme which was warned to be a failure then proved to be a failure and legally every way you look at it its doomed. Only someone with a personality disorder like IDS would persist with it oblivious of the harm it causes. To prove what? That the party shouldnt have dumped him? On the contrary all this of late proves they were right to dump him.

While strategy definition is done at EU level, implementation of ESF funding is the responsibility of EU Member States and regions. Once the strategy and budget allocation have been agreed, a shared approach to programming is taken. Seven-year Operational Programmes are planned by Member States and their regions together with the European Commission. These Operational Programmes describe the fields of activity that will be funded, which can be geographical or thematic.
The Member States designate national ESF management authorities that are responsible for selecting projects, disbursing funds, and evaluating the progress and results of projects. Certification and auditing authorities are also appointed to monitor and ensure compliance of expenditure to the ESF regulation.
Until 2007, approximately 5% of ESF funds were allocated to ‘Community Initiatives’ to support transnational and innovative actions. They have addressed such issues as employment for women (NOW), disabled people (INTEGRA) and young people, new professions and qualifications(EUROFORM) and adaptability (ADAPT). The most recent of these, the EQUAL Community Initiative, saw in the admission of 10 new Member States in 2004 but ended
in 2008.

@Pat Ago no I am not on twatter any more. They kicked me off for taking part in activism . However I notice with great irony Twitter has done nothing to stop the paedophile activity that goes on their site. Despite their promises to stop it.

I hate to say this, but I also tire of people who bang on about peado danger.
Its a bit like having a co worker woman who keeps on about how her thorough bred cat that has never been outside squeaks when it has shit in the tray to let you know if you dont clean the tray the next load is
in your bed . Its a bit too much. I know it, they should too.
Its not normal. If you suspect, tell the rozzers. Thats our responsibility min AND max
limit and the rozzers will beat you badly if you step on there toes.
With me? tip em orf and dont shout.
sorted.

@Johnny Void . How can you promote equal opportunities when you have private for profit companies and DWP mandating ie forcing jobseekers against their will to work unpaid doing pointless work for private for profit companies? How is that fit with equal opportunities? Opportunity for what ?

2. To help young people and those at
risk from not being able to find work

3. To improve training, education
and counselling for lifelong learning

4. To encourage entrepreneurship
and adaptability in the workplace

5. To promote equal opportunities and
improve the role of women in the workforce

Who
can apply?

Any
legally constituted organisation – public or private – can apply for ESF. Sole traders or individuals
cannot apply. Students, for example, cannot apply for funding for their university courses.

To
qualify for ESF funding all applicants must show their planned project takes account of the ESF themes
of mainstreaming equal opportunities, information and communication technology, local development and
sustainable development.

‘Improve the role of women in the workforce’ that’s quite clear isn’t it ?
So forcing Cait Reilly to work in poundland doesnt fit that aim does it ?
Not really..

If you believe the esf is geared any differently than the common agricultural policy (C.A.P.) then you are my friend a lost cause.
Do you see adverts around the U.K. telling british people how to get wedge from europe? You wont, even if the money is there.
You WILL see , however, leaflets on how to apply for a council hse
translated into over 52 languages, and interpreters paid for by the state on call to help anybody experiencing translation difficulty.
If you are a uk tax payer, your a mug to be fleeced. End Of.

They play with words . Getting ppl off benefits sounds like getting ppl into work when in fact its purely benefit removal. By introducing workfare they knew damned well the result would be to get ppl to sign off. Their chums in the media portrayed this as ‘proof’ of workshy .except how can you feed yrself with no income or perhaps ppl were finding work on their own without the crappy work program providers and useless UJM but since they had paid out stupid sums of money for this crap they had to justify it. But they can’t. Thats the thing a failed scheme by a failed poltician. Thanks for nothing potato head.

My conclusion is that it simply can’t.
Given a universal lack of experience in a generation of jobseekers. If you offered the same scheme to all of them, you merely propagate the overall appeal.
So the only option you’d be left with is selectively limiting who gets experience, which seems to be more controversial.
Even if you structured the schemes so that there were a range of skills on offer, how would you go about deciding how to designate which claimants get which skills?
And, if there was no better evidence to why this is all pointless, there still wouldn’t be the jobs available.

The best analogy I ever read for why ‘supporting’ claimants into work when there’s a poor labour market doesn’t work, has to be:

You’ve got 100 dogs and 90 bones.
Bury all the bones and see who comes back with something.
You know the maximum return will be 90 and at least 10 dogs will come back empty-mouthed.
So you can take those ~10 dogs and give them additional training and repeat the process. What do you know? No more than 90 bones come back.
The government isn’t willing to bury 10 more bones :P

with the disabled going through the mincer with all
draconian testing , i was shocked to find out on a site
in 2011 , between january and august, as many as
over a thousand disabled people commited suicide
after being thrown off disability allowance…..
the figures were found out through the freedom of
information act.
these criminals like david ‘fraud’ freud , ids , camoron
and all the condemn crew have got blood on their hands.

The Work Programme providers get a start fee for each job seeker they take on (£400 – £600) and a job outcome fee for each job seeker they successfully get into work for six months (they also get this fee if they had nothing to do with the person getting a job!). They also get further fees if the person stays in the job for longer than six months.

Follow Blog via Email

Iain Duncan Smith Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Dear Secretary of State, We are deeply concerned by your decision to award the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) contract to private contractor Maximus, rather than bring the work back … Continue reading →

This week the Conservatives announced in their manifesto they would introduce a new ‘community’ workfare scheme, specifically targeted at young people. This is odd because chancellor George Osbourne had already launched just such a workfare scheme last year – and neither David Cameron, Osbourne, nor the media appear to remember it. What does this workfare re […]

Just a small fraction of some of todays tweets, pictures and videos from today’s National Day of Action vs Maximarse Thanks to everyone who took part, on the streets in 30 towns and cities, on twitter and in solidarity with us in far away Toronto See more here from Kate Belgrave, a storify by Paul… Continue Reading Don’t relax Maximus, we’ll be back……. #Scra […]

Last Night’s Benefits Crackdown by Channel Four’s Dispatches was essential viewing. It came as this report (signaled by Unemployed in Tyne and Wear) was published. 100,000 Children Affected By Benefit Sanctions In 2013/14 A new report from a coalition of major UK Churches has revealed that around 100,000 children were affected by benefit sanctions in 2013/14 […]

Today, Netpol supporters received our February 2015 newsletter in their email in-boxes. It is now also available online here. If you would like to receive future email updates, sign up to Netpol’s ‘announcements’ list here.

Today, March 2nd 2015, has been the day of action against Maximus Inc, led by Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC). At this time, it is worth noting that recent copyright reforms means creators and artists are more free to parody … Continue reading →